Religions > Atheism > Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Dr Dave W" |
| Date: |
23 May 2004 10:00:30 AM |
| Object: |
Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.3920:/
Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004
(Introduced in House)
HR 3920 IH
108th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 3920
To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme
Court.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 9, 2004
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky (for himself, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. EVERETT, Mr. POMBO,
Mr. COBLE, Mr. COLLINS, Mr. GOODE, Mr. PITTS, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr.
HEFLEY, Mr. DOOLITTLE, and Mr. KINGSTON) introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to
the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
A BILL
To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme
Court.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Congressional Accountability for
Judicial Activism Act of 2004'.
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.
The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a
judgment of the United States Supreme Court--
(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the
constitutionality of an Act of Congress.
SEC. 3. PROCEDURE.
The procedure for reversing a judgment under section 2 shall be, as
near as may be and consistent with the authority of each House of
Congress to adopt its own rules of proceeding, the same as that used for
considering whether or not to override a veto of legislation by the
President.
SEC. 4. BASIS FOR ENACTMENT.
This Act is enacted pursuant to the power of Congress under article
III, section 2, of the Constitution of the United States.
--
Dave W a.a.#1967
.
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
23 May 2004 11:24:30 AM |
|
|
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.
The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a
judgment of the United States Supreme Court--
(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the
constitutionality of an Act of Congress.
Why don't they just dissolve the Supreme Court altogether? That's what they
really want to do. Perhaps they just want it around as a rubber stamp body,
like the Soviet courts were.
Just when did the Republicans start acting like doctrinaire Stalinists?
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
23 May 2004 05:30:37 PM |
|
|
"Lord Calvert" <forlornh@aol.complicated> wrote in message
news:20040523122430.23696.00001333@mb-m20.aol.com...
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.
The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a
judgment of the United States Supreme Court--
(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the
constitutionality of an Act of Congress.
Why don't they just dissolve the Supreme Court altogether? That's what
they
really want to do. Perhaps they just want it around as a rubber stamp
body,
like the Soviet courts were.
Just when did the Republicans start acting like doctrinaire Stalinists?
Start?
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Dollar Bill" |
|
| Title: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
23 May 2004 08:47:44 PM |
|
|
In alt.atheism on Sun, 23 May 2004 17:30:37 -0500, "Denis Loubet"
<dloubet@io.com> wrote:
"Lord Calvert" <forlornh@aol.complicated> wrote in message
news:20040523122430.23696.00001333@mb-m20.aol.com...
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.
The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a
judgment of the United States Supreme Court--
(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the
constitutionality of an Act of Congress.
Why don't they just dissolve the Supreme Court altogether? That's what
they
really want to do. Perhaps they just want it around as a rubber stamp
body,
like the Soviet courts were.
Just when did the Republicans start acting like doctrinaire Stalinists?
Start?
In their defense, I _do_ remember a time when "Republican" didn't
automatically equal "Nazi". Admittedly, it's getting increasingly
difficult to remember such things with the passage of time, but they
_did_ exist... once upon a time... :-/
--
L8r,
Uncle Dollar Bill
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Beowulf" |
|
| Title: Re: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
25 May 2004 11:31:06 AM |
|
|
On 23 May 2004 16:24:30 GMT, forlornh@aol.complicated (Lord Calvert)
ejaculated:
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.
The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a
judgment of the United States Supreme Court--
(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the
constitutionality of an Act of Congress.
Why don't they just dissolve the Supreme Court altogether? That's what they
really want to do. Perhaps they just want it around as a rubber stamp body,
like the Soviet courts were.
Just when did the Republicans start acting like doctrinaire Stalinists?
Wasn't it around 1984?
--
"You claimed all this time that you would die for me.
Why, then, are you so surprised when you hear your own eulogy?"
- Tool, "Eulogy"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
23 May 2004 04:09:46 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 May 2004 16:24:30 +0000 in episode
<20040523122430.23696.00001333@mb-m20.aol.com> we saw our hero
forlornh@aol.complicated (Lord Calvert):
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.
The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a
judgment of the United States Supreme Court--
(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the
constitutionality of an Act of Congress.
Why don't they just dissolve the Supreme Court altogether? That's what
they really want to do. Perhaps they just want it around as a rubber stamp
body, like the Soviet courts were.
Just when did the Republicans start acting like doctrinaire Stalinists?
Since the rise of the neo-conservatives.
They are breathtakingly Soviet...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"Being surprised at the fact that the universe
is fine tuned for life is akin to a puddle being
surprised at how well it fits its hole"
[Douglas Adams]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dr Dave W" |
|
| Title: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
23 May 2004 11:33:40 AM |
|
|
forlornh@aol.complicated (Lord Calvert) wrote in
news:20040523122430.23696.00001333@mb-m20.aol.com:
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.
The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a
judgment of the United States Supreme Court--
(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the
constitutionality of an Act of Congress.
Why don't they just dissolve the Supreme Court altogether? That's what
they really want to do. Perhaps they just want it around as a rubber
stamp body, like the Soviet courts were.
Just when did the Republicans start acting like doctrinaire
Stalinists?
When us satan worshipping atheists and sodomites got all uppity and
started to want equal protection. The nerve!
--
Dave W a.a.#1967
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tink" |
|
| Title: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
24 May 2004 09:50:49 AM |
|
|
Dr Dave W wrote:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.3920:/
Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004
(Introduced in House)
HR 3920 IH
108th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 3920
To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme
Court.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 9, 2004
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky (for himself, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. EVERETT, Mr. POMBO,
Mr. COBLE, Mr. COLLINS, Mr. GOODE, Mr. PITTS, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr.
HEFLEY, Mr. DOOLITTLE, and Mr. KINGSTON) introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to
the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
A BILL
To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme
Court.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Congressional Accountability for
Judicial Activism Act of 2004'.
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.
The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a
judgment of the United States Supreme Court--
(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the
constitutionality of an Act of Congress.
SEC. 3. PROCEDURE.
The procedure for reversing a judgment under section 2 shall be, as
near as may be and consistent with the authority of each House of
Congress to adopt its own rules of proceeding, the same as that used for
considering whether or not to override a veto of legislation by the
President.
SEC. 4. BASIS FOR ENACTMENT.
This Act is enacted pursuant to the power of Congress under article
III, section 2, of the Constitution of the United States.
NIce try, but the act itself is unconstitutional.
--
"There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher-
the clergyman." [Victor Hugo]
The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS# 8808
EAC Chairman, Division of Skydiving and Sushi consumption.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
24 May 2004 10:56:13 AM |
|
|
NIce try, but the act itself is unconstitutional.
I think what the Republicans are also forgetting is that they won't be in power
forever (unless they really DO believe that they can turn the US into a
Christian dictatorship under their control). Eventually another political party
will gain control of congress and SCOTUS decisions that they support would
suddenly find themselves overturned by this very law. I think suddenly they'd
find themselves very strongly opposed to this bill then.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
23 May 2004 04:09:11 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 23 May 2004 15:00:30 +0000 in episode
<Xns94F25179D7036ou812@199.45.49.11> we saw our hero Dr Dave W
<askme@formyaddy.comINVALID>:
To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme
Court.
How cute.
And if this passed into law and the court held it unconstitutional, then
what? Civil war?
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"Being surprised at the fact that the universe
is fine tuned for life is akin to a puddle being
surprised at how well it fits its hole"
[Douglas Adams]
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "YOELK" |
|
| Title: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
24 May 2004 05:04:20 PM |
|
|
Since I do not understand the subject completely (as I am not US
citizen)
I would like to ask - in what way does the proposed act differ from
current legal statue? Does it mean a change of the US constitution
established more
then 200 years ago? Can this change be done by a plain majority in
Congress
and Senate? What if the US supreme court would declare this
legistlation,
assuming it passes, unconstitutional?
-----
YOELK
Dr Dave W <askme@formyaddy.comINVALID> wrote in message news:<Xns94F25179D7036ou812@199.45.49.11>...
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.3920:/
Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004
(Introduced in House)
HR 3920 IH
108th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 3920
To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme
Court.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 9, 2004
Mr. LEWIS of Kentucky (for himself, Mr. DEMINT, Mr. EVERETT, Mr. POMBO,
Mr. COBLE, Mr. COLLINS, Mr. GOODE, Mr. PITTS, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Mr.
HEFLEY, Mr. DOOLITTLE, and Mr. KINGSTON) introduced the following bill;
which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to
the Committee on Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the
Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned
A BILL
To allow Congress to reverse the judgments of the United States Supreme
Court.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Congressional Accountability for
Judicial Activism Act of 2004'.
SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL REVERSAL OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS.
The Congress may, if two thirds of each House agree, reverse a
judgment of the United States Supreme Court--
(1) if that judgment is handed down after the date of the
enactment of this Act; and
(2) to the extent that judgment concerns the
constitutionality of an Act of Congress.
SEC. 3. PROCEDURE.
The procedure for reversing a judgment under section 2 shall be, as
near as may be and consistent with the authority of each House of
Congress to adopt its own rules of proceeding, the same as that used for
considering whether or not to override a veto of legislation by the
President.
SEC. 4. BASIS FOR ENACTMENT.
This Act is enacted pursuant to the power of Congress under article
III, section 2, of the Constitution of the United States.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dr Dave W" |
|
| Title: Re: Congressional Accountability for Judicial Activism Act of 2004 |
24 May 2004 05:50:48 PM |
|
|
(YOELK) wrote in
news:28891102.0405241404.7afd9455@posting.google.com:
Since I do not understand the subject completely (as I am not US
citizen)
I would like to ask - in what way does the proposed act differ from
current legal statue? Does it mean a change of the US constitution
established more
then 200 years ago? Can this change be done by a plain majority in
Congress
and Senate? What if the US supreme court would declare this
legistlation,
assuming it passes, unconstitutional?
-----
YOELK
The amendment process:
http://www.usconstitution.net/constam.html
Basically this bill, passed by a simple majority would circumvent the
normal amendment process and require only a 2/3 majority in the house and
senate. I would have to think it would be spanked by the Supreme Court in
a heartbeat...
I don't think something like this could get through committee... Much
less a vote on the floor.
--
Dave W a.a.#1967
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
